Side-stepping other motivations for KJV

[Heretic Hunter]

The KJV is not the only holy bible.

That is the debate of this Century. I contend that The KJB 1611 is The Holy Bible; the others are Gnostified knock-offs, and as I mentioned, I intend to make a solid case for this argument soon, in an up and coming thread.

 

[Logos1560]

Any supposed bias on my part would be in favor of the KJV, which I have read and accepted for many years as what it actually is. Perhaps I can see more clearly how bias in favor of the KJV could prevent a sound understanding of the truth.

Some posters allege bias while they may demonstrate that they close their eyes to their own personal biases.

I attempt to present as accurate information concerning the KJV as possible. In agreement with clear scriptural truths, I advocate the use of consistent, sound, just measures/standards and oppose the use of unjust divers measures/standards [an abomination to the LORD].

 

[SovereignGrace]

That is the debate of this Century. I contend that The KJB 1611 is The Holy Bible; the others are Gnostified knock-offs, and as I mentioned, I intend to make a solid case for this argument soon, in an up and coming thread.

You are so wrong. This is a 1611 KJV...

Does your KJV have 'The Gofpel according to S. Iohn'? If not, then you're not reading the inspired KJV bible, but a modern revision.

 

[SovereignGrace]

It demonstrates one to be deceived and deceiving, as the bias is against The Holy Bible in favor of the inferior mis-translation; an issue of which I intend to address soon in an up and coming thread.

How much longer are you going to parade around here using these not so thinly veiled attacks on Logos1560's salvation? You have been reported for doing this.

#Sayanara

 

[Logos1560]

I contend that The KJB 1611 is The Holy Bible.

Your personal subjective opinion is not scripture. Assuming that it is by use of fallacies such as begging the question would not prove your opinion to be true.

The truth remains that the 1611 KJV is not actually the Scriptures given directly by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles.

The KJV is a Bible translation in the same sense as the pre-1611 English Bibles of which it is a revision and in the same sense as post-1611 English Bibles such as the NKJV.

How can you contend the actual proven errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV are scripture given by inspiration of God?

 

[SovereignGrace]

'Chrift aboue'

Who's Chrift? I know who Christ is, as He is my Saviour. But this Chrift?

Who's Pavl?

What's an Apoftle?

Sure reads like a divinely inspired translation.

 

[Heretic Hunter]

Any supposed bias on my part would be in favor of the KJV, which I have read and accepted for many years as what it actually is. Perhaps I can see more clearly how bias in favor of the KJV could prevent a sound understanding of the truth.

Some posters allege bias while they may demonstrate that they close their eyes to their own personal biases.

I attempt to present as accurate information concerning the KJV as possible. In agreement with clear scriptural truths, I advocate the use of consistent, sound, just measures/standards and oppose the use of unjust divers measures/standards [an abomination to the LORD].

Rick, I am convinced of your sincerity at this point. I am convinced of everyone's sincerity. It is my contention that there is a vast amount of deception, and it must require an undertaking to unpack it. That is what the up and coming thread will be about. It's not about destroying any of the Brethren here, but with the objective to shed serious light on this subject of deception that has harmed the Baptist Church and other Denominations. I've been at work on drafting some of the work today, and will spend all the time required for it's completion. When we should be in agreement, we are in disagreement; and I hope that once and when this is ready to be published here on BB, that you and our Brothers will give the evidence a careful, prayerful, and fair examination.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Your personal subjective opinion is not scripture. Assuming that it is by use of fallacies such as begging the question would not prove your opinion to be true.

The truth remains that the 1611 KJV is not actually the Scriptures given directly by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles.

The KJV is a Bible translation in the same sense as the pre-1611 English Bibles of which it is a revision and in the same sense as post-1611 English Bibles such as the NKJV.

How can you contend the actual proven errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV are scripture given by inspiration of God?

He contends the KJB 1611 is the Holy Bible...and uses anything but the 1611 version.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Rick, I am convinced of your sincerity at this point. I am convinced of everyone's sincerity. It is my contention that there is a vast amount of deception, and it must require an undertaking to unpack it. That is what the up and coming thread will be about. It's not about destroying any of the Brethren here, but with the objective to shed serious light on this subject of deception that has harmed the Baptist Church and other Denominations. I've been at work on drafting some of the work today, and will spend all the time required for it's completion. When we should be in agreement, we are in disagreement; and I hope that once and when this is ready to be published here on BB, that you and our Brothers will give the evidence a careful, prayerful, and fair examination.

You have crossed yourself. You say the 1611 KJB is the Holy Bible, but you don't use it...but the modern revised versions of the KJB.

 

[Heretic Hunter]

How much longer are you going to parade around here using these not so thinly veiled attacks on Logos1560's salvation? You have been reported for doing this.

#Sayanara

Reported to whom? To man or God? I didn't attack Rick's salvation. I contend that many have been beguiled against trusting The Holy Bible. Does that bother you that I have declared my position concerning this matter?

 

[Heretic Hunter]

You have crossed yourself. You say the 1611 KJB is the Holy Bible, but you don't use it...but the modern revised versions of the KJB.

You are knitpicking with me. Get a grip here.

 

[SovereignGrace]

You are knitpicking with me. Get a grip here.

Get a grip? Srsly? You say the 1611 KJB is the Holy Bible. What scriptures you post are from modern updated KJB's. That is not knitpicking...it is stating facts.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Reported to whom? To man or God? I didn't attack Rick's salvation. I contend that many have been beguiled against trusting The Holy Bible. Does that bother you that I have declared my position concerning this matter?

You said he was deceived and deceiving ppl. Sure looks like you did to me.

 

[SovereignGrace]

You are knitpicking with me. Get a grip here.

This is from the 1611 KJB that you have made an idol out of...

And she shall bring forth a sonne, and thou shalt call his Name Iesus: for hee shall saue his people from their sinnes.[Matthew 1:21 1611 KJB]

This is the KJB you quote from...

And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.[Matthew 1:21]

So, you read from a modern updated KJB...

 

[Logos1560]

I intend to make a solid case for this argument soon, in an up and coming thread.

Your case will not actually be solid and sound if use of fallacies [false arguments] is still evident in some of what you assume or claim.

 

[Yeshua1]

Bible-believing Baptists in the 1600's pointed out examples of Church of England bias in the 1611 KJV.

If there had been doctrinally-sound Baptists on the translating team, some examples of likely differences could be seen in the 1842 revision of the KJV by Baptists.

The Nkjv might be seen as the real Baptist revision of the 1611 Kjv...

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes I have....and you label me a liar.

You basically deny God’s promises of preservation.

Plus......you Don’t hold in your hands an authoritive word of God.

Which Hebrew/Greek text are you now holding? As Those are the "authoritative word of God"

 

[Yeshua1]

In my last reply to this thread, I will state this:

Due to the obvious ( to me ) lack of arriving at a new standard Bible in the English, it has been demonstrated that out of all of today's popular English translations, not one was developed with an eye to accuracy as great as that found in the "KJV", and not one of them was ever developed with the eventual goal of attaining a singular, "best" translation in the English.

Whether it's in using the CT or in avoiding, in their wording, other copyrighted "bibles" out there, none are satisfactory, in my estimation...not even the "NKJV".
As I see it, the train rolls on with no end in sight, no matter what rhetoric is constructed in support of the current, for-profit publisher-supported translation efforts in English.



I have the Bible I started out my sojourn with, and it's a good one, from my perspective.
Again, as I've stated many times before, I see no reason to spend money that I know can go towards helping my brothers and sisters, in purchasing a "bible" that disagrees in so many places with the one that I know is God's word in my own language.

I have no desire to attack people, but I also have no desire to engage in conversation with those who are convinced that nothing is wrong with the modern English translations, either.
The facts are well-known on the internet, and this forum isn't likely to change any of the predominant thinking anywhere.

Finally,
I don't have to "prove" anything.
My opinion is my own, and my research into this subject is very intensive.

I'm not satisfied that I can ever trust anyone but God Himself to show me where to find His words...and I'm very satisfied that He already has.


May God bless all of you greatly.

The Nas Bible was produced off/revision of the Asv 1901, and many, who held to prominence of the Kjv, also acknowledge that version was a good one to use for study!

 

[Yeshua1]

The NKJB does the following and this is a very small sample.

The NKJV removes the word "Lord" 66 times!

The NKJV removes the word God 51 times!

The NKJV removes the word "heaven" 50 times!

Were those terms in the originals though?

 

[Yeshua1]

That is the debate of this Century. I contend that The KJB 1611 is The Holy Bible; the others are Gnostified knock-offs, and as I mentioned, I intend to make a solid case for this argument soon, in an up and coming thread.

So is the Nas/Nkjv/Niv/Esv also, and do you see the 1769, 1842, 1984 revisions as valid also?